Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:I Pay (Score 1) 328

by Arker (#46762507) Attached to: Netflix Gets What It Pays For: Comcast Streaming Speeds Skyrocket
Problem with that line of argument (besides the stupid personal attacks which do not contribute) is that this was never on Netflix's end and that has been confirmed over and over again. Problem only affects people on comcast, and only after someone at comcast got the bright idea to shake Netflix down.  Comcast customers (the few of them with the technical knowledge that is) could get around the breakage by disguising their traffic and many did so.

I hope you are getting paid well to astroturf here, enough to compensate you for your integrity.

Comment Re:I Pay (Score 1) 328

by Arker (#46762211) Attached to: Netflix Gets What It Pays For: Comcast Streaming Speeds Skyrocket
"It is not Comcast's responsibility to provide enough bandwidth for you to stream a 3rd party software at maximum bandwidth"

Yes, if you paid them for that bandwidth, it is indeed their responsibility to provide it. Third party software? Everything on your computer is third party software, what else would you be using?

Your argument appears to make no sense whatsoever.

Comment Re:Wat? (Score 4, Insightful) 582

by Arker (#46761787) Attached to: How Does Heartbleed Alter the 'Open Source Is Safer' Discussion?
"The problem here is that people have been using the argument that Open Source is better because these issues can't happen "because" of the visibility."

No, just no. No one with any sort of a clue ever argued these issues cannot happen with Free Software. It's good practice, it helps, but it's no silver bullet. That's just as true as it ever was and this news in no way contradicts that.

Comment Re:The whole approach is wrong (Score 1) 189

by Arker (#46761253) Attached to: The Security of Popular Programming Languages
"Or at least no such thing as a project that only employs or accepts contributions from such programmers."

You could probably find a few drawing decent salaries in less public areas, but certainly it's a skill that the tech world in general has no appreciation for at all. And even though I hate it I can understand why - if you have two companies developing a similar product, one does it quick and cheap, the other takes the time to do it right - the first one will 'own the market' before the second can get there. And with that position it has the cash flow to keep paying programmers, while the second one closes their doors.

The same dynamic still plagues non-commercial projects as well, a quick but shoddy project can gain mindshare and take off before one that does things right has a product to show at all.

There are a few places where people are willing to pay the price for secure code, and the way things are going I suspect that is increasing, but it's still a tiny minority of available positions.

Comment Re:So Netflix wants to change how it connects (Score 4, Informative) 328

by Arker (#46758189) Attached to: Netflix Gets What It Pays For: Comcast Streaming Speeds Skyrocket
You have basically everything backwards here.

Netflix is not the comcast customer. Netflix pays their own ISP for their bandwidth already.

It's not Netflix which is using all this bandwidth on comcasts network - it's comcast customers who are using it. And they already paid for it.

Comcast wants to bill twice. I am sure they would bill 20 times if they could get away with it.

And they are the 800lb gorilla with an effective monopoly position in many markets and no scruples whatsoever. Netflix folded to extortion, and the precedent is certainly not one that will benefit any users, unless it's the users that are also comcast stock owners.

Comment Re:Ukraine's borders were changed by use of force (Score 1) 304

by Arker (#46756843) Attached to: Is Crimea In Russia? Internet Companies Have Different Answers
"Any and all counter-arguments like "but they voted" are meaningless: first, the voting took place under the "gentle" guidance of Russian military"

By that logic the vote for statehood in Alaska was meaningless as well - in fact it's even worse, because the US troops voted!

If you are just making an abstract point, fine, conceded. If you are implying that there is any legitimate US interest to be pursued through pressing that point and pursuing confrontation with Russia? I do not see one.

Comment Re:Gatling guns? (Score 0) 157

by Arker (#46753043) Attached to: Will This Flying Car Get Crowdfunded?
"A failing road car stops on the road. Not always ideal, but generally a controllable event"

Far from ideal, quite often fatal. A failing car on a crowded interstate can result in an accident involving many vehicles with lots of casualties, and this happens shockingly often.

"A failing flying car drops out of the sky."

Unlikely. You have redundant systems,  if your main control system fails the backup kicks in, you have 8 engines and still have limited flight abilities even if over half of them fail simultaneously, and even if absolutely everything else fails there is a parachute big enough to bring the entire car down relatively gently.

"Therefore it has to be orders of magnitude more reliable than your typical car."

Yes, that part is correct.

Comment Re:Gatling guns? (Score 0) 157

by Arker (#46752983) Attached to: Will This Flying Car Get Crowdfunded?
Yeah, because Sealand is such a huge market.

Things like light-sport and ultralight aviation met a lot of resistance and took years to be accepted, but they work just fine. Yes, they are dangerous but lots of things are dangerous and we cope nonetheless. Driving a car is incredibly dangerous, the roads are overcrowded, and people are dying every day from that already.

But it's a politically safe choice to do nothing about it, because people are used to it. Whereas it's politically risky to allow people to choose another route, even if it's clearly safer, because undoubtedly there will be some accidents either way, and if you made a change that allowed a new type of accident you would be in the news and people would blame you, while you are unlikely to be blamed for all the accidents you could have prevented but did not if you simply preserve the status quo.

Comment Re:Gatling guns? (Score 0) 157

by Arker (#46751297) Attached to: Will This Flying Car Get Crowdfunded?
1. Flying cars exist, and have for decades. Look up Moller. They have a really good product already engineered, they just need to pay off the FAA before they can start selling. So I would back their project rather than this one.

2. Adding a third dimension actually expands the driving space dramatically, alleviating congestion and making collisions less likely since there is so much more space to use. Certainly there would be safety issues but there is no reason to think they would be more severe than the issues with groundbound automobiles. Are you in favor of banning them too?

Comment Re:Stop calling it 'blood moon'! (Score 1) 146

by Arker (#46749261) Attached to: The Best Way To Watch the "Blood Moon" Tonight
I agree, it's a lunar eclipse, why cant they just call it what it is?

And it's not like they just made up a cutesy name that wasnt in use - a blood moon is an actual thing, but it's still many months in the future.

Marketing and advertising will never be satisfied until they destroy the language so completely that it can no longer be used to communicate at all.

Slashdot Top Deals

"I've seen it. It's rubbish." -- Marvin the Paranoid Android

Close